research_web_cancel

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description discloses that it sends a cancel request and cleans up local tracking state, adding significant behavioral context beyond the annotations. No contradictions with readOnlyHint=false.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two concise sentences with no wasted words, front-loading the purpose. It efficiently communicates the key information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is simple with one parameter, and the description covers the main actions and use case. It does not mention potential failure modes or state requirements, but with an output schema present, this is adequate.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The single parameter interaction_id is fully described in the input schema with a description and minLength. The tool description does not add any additional meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool cancels a running Deep Research task, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like research_web (starts tasks) and research_web_status (checks status).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description mentions it is useful for aborting expensive tasks early, providing clear context for when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, so it's slightly short of a 5.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.